MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2058823726 · doi:10.4012/dmj.2013-275

Inorganic polyphosphate adsorbed onto hydroxyapatite for guided bone regeneration: An animal study

2014· article· en· W2058823726 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kazuya Doi, Takayasu Kubo, R. Takeshita, Shiho Kajihara, Shinichi Kato, Yumi Kawazoe, Toshikazu Shiba, Yasumasa Akagawa

Bibliographic record

VenueDental Materials Journal · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBone Tissue Engineering Materials
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of Science
KeywordsPolyphosphateBuccal administrationMaterials scienceRegeneration (biology)DentistryImplantIn vivoBeagleBiomedical engineeringDental implantChemistryMedicinePhosphateSurgeryBiologyCell biologyInternal medicineBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Inorganic polyphosphate (poly(P)) is recognized as a therapeutic agent that promotes fibroblast growth factor and enhances osteogenic differentiation, and in vivo, when adsorbed onto interconnected porous calcium hydroxyapatite (IP-CHA) enhances bone regeneration. The present study focused on the effect of poly(P) adsorbed onto IP-CHA granules (Poly(P)/IP-CHA) in guided bone regeneration (GBR). Dental implants were placed into the edentulous mandibular areas of five Beagle-Labrador hybrid dogs with screw expose on the buccal side, and then bone defects were filled Poly(P)/IP-CHA (test) or IP-CHA (control). After 12 weeks, histological evaluation and histomorphometrical analysis were performed. Newly-bone formation around exposed implant screw was clearly detected in the test-group. The ratio for regenerated bone height in the test group versus the control-group was 85.6±20.2 and 62.6±23.8, respectively, with no significant difference, while, that for bone implant contact was significantly higher (67.9±11.8 and 48.8±14.1, respectively). These findings indicate that Poly(P)/IP-CHA enhances bone regeneration in GBR.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.226 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDental Materials JournalSame topicBone Tissue Engineering MaterialsFrench-language works237,207